Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Hewitt Road Illegal Conversion - The latest
In a nutshell: About last February I identified 98 as an illegal conversion having noticed that there was significant work going on. The final give away being the addition of 5 gas meters on the exterior of the building. It took be about 6-8 weeks to get the enforcement team in. There then followed a period of about 6 months with me calling the enforcement team every week or so to keep things moving.
Originally I kept my head down about it on this site because Patrick Sullivan said that the landlord was potentially dangerous. I've since poked my head above the parapet!
An enforcement notice was served against the property on the 22nd of October alleging that the property had been converted into 5 self-contained units. The notice came into effect on the 5th of December last year (meaning the owners had until this date to lodge an appeal). The owners lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate on the 2nd of December. Representations were be made by the Council and the Appellant to the Planning Inspectorate by the 3rd of February 2009 and the Inspector made a decision on 8th May against the appellant, upholding the Council's decision..
I learned of the result in late June by calling up and asking for an update.
I've just spoken to the department head at enforcement, Miles Joyce, and got the low-down on next stages.
And what are the sanctions? According to Miles, it seems like at worst it could be £5 - 10,000 + Haringey's costs, which he estimated at between £500 and £1,000. So £11,000 maximum. But here's the sting in the tail. According to Miles if either stages 3 or 5 the landlord agrees to comply, the decision is likely to be taken to waive the fine in favour of compliance and just seek recovery of costs.
I wonder what the maths of this are:
1. What would the conversion costs be? £30,000?
2. Rental income for 22 months.
3. 5 rooms at 300 per month? = £1,500 pcm rental income.
4. £1,500 x 22 = £33,000
My figures are huge estimates. I'd be grateful for better info so we can get the facts right. If they are about right, it seems like on this occasion the maths don't stack up for the landlord. BUT, this conversion was picked up from the earliest possible point (before anyone moved in). If it dragged on another year, does this mean that it would have begun to make commercial sense for the landlord? Do the conversion, risk a small fine but stand a good chance of getting away with it.
Assuming the illegal conversion is successfully challenged I wonder how much the enforcement of stiff fines would have a deterrent effect? Or, would it make no difference?
My point in picking this one up and following it through hasn't been about this house; it's been to send a message that any conversion in this road will be challenged and fought. So, don't bother. It's taken up time, but it looks hopeful that we may win through. Have I been "lucky"?
Originally I kept my head down about it on this site because Patrick Sullivan said that the landlord was potentially dangerous. I've since poked my head above the parapet!
An enforcement notice was served against the property on the 22nd of October alleging that the property had been converted into 5 self-contained units. The notice came into effect on the 5th of December last year (meaning the owners had until this date to lodge an appeal). The owners lodged an appeal with the Planning Inspectorate on the 2nd of December. Representations were be made by the Council and the Appellant to the Planning Inspectorate by the 3rd of February 2009 and the Inspector made a decision on 8th May against the appellant, upholding the Council's decision..
I learned of the result in late June by calling up and asking for an update.
I've just spoken to the department head at enforcement, Miles Joyce, and got the low-down on next stages.
1. The landlord has 3 months from the Planning Inspector's decision to comply. That's up to 8th August.
2. Within 10 days of that date the enforcement team will visit to ascertain whether the breach is still occurring. (We know that it very likely will be).
3. Enforcement will then send a letter giving notice of intention to prosecute with 14 days to contact them to resolve the issue.
4. If there's no contact, the enforcement team then work alongside the legal team to prepare prosecution.
5. If there is a prosecution, we might expect that in Sept/Oct. At the prosecution the landlord could put his hands up and plead guilty and agree to comply. Or, he could plead not guilty and things could drag on.
6. The landlord will then have 3 months to get the tenant out - so let's say end of Jan - plus a further two months to do the remedial work - in other words convert back to a house.
And what are the sanctions? According to Miles, it seems like at worst it could be £5 - 10,000 + Haringey's costs, which he estimated at between £500 and £1,000. So £11,000 maximum. But here's the sting in the tail. According to Miles if either stages 3 or 5 the landlord agrees to comply, the decision is likely to be taken to waive the fine in favour of compliance and just seek recovery of costs.
I wonder what the maths of this are:
1. What would the conversion costs be? £30,000?
2. Rental income for 22 months.
3. 5 rooms at 300 per month? = £1,500 pcm rental income.
4. £1,500 x 22 = £33,000
My figures are huge estimates. I'd be grateful for better info so we can get the facts right. If they are about right, it seems like on this occasion the maths don't stack up for the landlord. BUT, this conversion was picked up from the earliest possible point (before anyone moved in). If it dragged on another year, does this mean that it would have begun to make commercial sense for the landlord? Do the conversion, risk a small fine but stand a good chance of getting away with it.
Assuming the illegal conversion is successfully challenged I wonder how much the enforcement of stiff fines would have a deterrent effect? Or, would it make no difference?
My point in picking this one up and following it through hasn't been about this house; it's been to send a message that any conversion in this road will be challenged and fought. So, don't bother. It's taken up time, but it looks hopeful that we may win through. Have I been "lucky"?
Tags for Forum Posts: 98 Hewitt, hewitt, hmo profits, hmos, illegal conversion
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Rachella on
-
This is very interesting. I had a conservation with Mr. Joyce today and he said he's understaffed and can't put too much effort into Noel Park so I think this is great something has actually happened in Noel Park. Good job!!
We've started a Conservation Area Advisory Committee and are working on a brochure to distribute to the residents. BTW, you're welcome to come. Our next meeting is Monday, 7:00PM at Shropshire Hall on Gladstone.
I personally think that eventually word will get around among the buy-to-let landlords that neighbours are paying attention. Only then will this type of thing stop.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
Here's a "studio" flat in Hewitt Road going for £150 pw. Offered by Alpha lets on Gumtree.
Pretty tidy sum to have 4 or 5 of those in a house, eh?
-
Permalink Reply by james walsh on
-
Liz, I lived in one of these 'flats'. It is One room what used to be called 'self contained'. The electric heating is in third photo next to the bed. They hoover up money so they are impossible to use and give out no heat of significance. Not a slum but what i would call a 'template' because they all end up identical in that all the materials, furniture etc are sourced from the cheapest supplier, B&Q etc. Notice the tiny electric ring 'cooker' and shower/toilet. The laminate flooring causes stress to the people below because of foot tread. There is nothing here that has to be because of building & fire regs. This isn't so much a landlord as a farmer. I hate it.
I have to say that £150 pw. is very very cheap.
same as all in life - you gets what you pays for.
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
OK, so, if it's £150 and up the conversion costs, the sums could look like this:
1. Conversion costs be? £50,000?
2. Rental income for 22 months.
3. 5 rooms at 600 per month? = £3,000 pcm rental income.
4. £3,000 x 22 = £66,000.
At that rate, the sums seem to make more sense. The situation with this house must be about the shortest let period on an illegal conversion a landlord could expect - a worst case scenario. And, even in that event there's a small, if unexciting profit (excluding maintenance/repairs/letting fees). If the rental period could be extended for a further 6 to 12 months - which I imagine would be more typical - breaking the law becomes a win option even when a case is successfully prosecuted against them.
-
-
Please calculate again.
The 'flat' i occupied was charged at a rate of £360 per week.
This was paid for by our government through my housing benefit, directly to the letting agency based in crouch end.
While i was living there i also found 99% of all other 'flats' of the same category in the same area to be of roughly the same rental value.
My figures do not cover every letting but give a 'guesstimate'.
Also please factor in that this type of 'landlord' do not usually hurry to repair fixtures or fittings (incurring expense).
-
-
I'd also suggest that conversion probably costs less. They will have tame builders who work cash in hand and do deals for the cheapest fixtures and fittings as James says above; cheap laminate flooring, white tiles, cheapest bathroom and 'kitchen fittings'. This looks like a converted back room so will be pretty small space to cover. It may also be a better conversion than some ( I saw much worse when house hunting at the lower end of the market), some houses on the Ladder have 8 doorbells...
-
-
I'm not the expert but from what Steve, Vix and LIz have said £150 seems much nearer the mark, James.
-
-
Sorry Hugh i meant only 'emergency housing'.
i had to be moved for protection by the police (case ended now)
-
-
Had a quick gander in Alpha Lets window; prices between £110 for Eade Road to £156 for a 'studio' on Green Lanes.
-
-
OK new part to the tale.
In another ruse, the landlord has now lodged a planning application to convert this property to two flats, claiming a reduction in the number of bedrooms. I think we should do our best to ensure that landlords make as little gain as possible from illegal conversions and whilst I don't think for a minute that the planning Department will be taken in by this ruse (will they??), I think it's worth our objecting.
If you'd like to take the 2 or 3 minutes it takes to do that, you can do so here.
-
-
Good news. Just got a phone call from Haringey Council to update me on this (Yes, impressive. They called me!).
Haringey had contacted the landlord to give him notice of their intention to prosecute. He's now said that he's going to comply with the enforcement notice and return the property to a single dwelling by the end of February. (And, yes I'll be diarying a follow-up on that).
So, from my first reporting it in February of 2008, that'll be two years he'll have had the rental income!
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
Good news. Just a suggestion but as this will be a major piece of work, it would be worth seeing if anything has started by the end of January. It's not the kind of thing that can be done in 4 weeks so if no sign of work then, I'd contact the council again. This has the smell of a landlord procrastinating as long as possible written all over it (particularly given Patrick Sullivan's comments you noted in your original post).
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
